ORISSA AT CUTTACK BLAPL No. 12931 of 2023 · Orissa High Court

Opposite Party Ms.J.Tripathy, ASC, Vigilance CORAM: JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No. 03. ORDER 15.12.2023 (Through hybrid mode)

This application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No.31 of 2023 corresponding to VGR Case No. 34 of 2023, pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (b)/12 of the Prevention of the Corruption Act.

The petitioner had moved an application for bail before the Court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar which was rejected on 08.11.2023.

The prosecution allegation in brief is that on the allegations of acquisition and possession of disproportionate assets by the petitioner who was working as Executive Engineer, Rural Works Sub-Division, Salepur in the district of Cuttack, raids were conducted on 03.11.2023 at different places and it was found that the petitioner has accumulated huge assets during his service period from 21.02.1992 to 03.11.2023 to the tune of Rs.3,27, 56, 805/-, i.e., 455% of his known source of income for which he failed to give a reasonable explanation. So, he was arrested.

Mr.P.S.Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.11.2023 and the value of his assets have not been calculated property and one property has been calculated twice while the ancestral properties which was inherited from his father has been taken into consideration in in his assets and a car belonging to his brother, Daitary Sahoo has also been taken as a part of his property and another car which does not belong to his wife has been shown to be hers. He further submits that major part of the investigation is over and as the case relates to verification of documentary evidence, the detention of the petitioner in further custody is not warranted. He further submits that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation.

Ms.J.Tripathy, learned Addl. Standing Counsel, Vigilance opposes the prayer for bail stating that the petitioner was found to be in possession 455% of assets disproportionate to his income and he had been given a chance to produce the documents that the assets did not belong to him but he has not done so the pleas and abjections raised by him have been taken into consideration by the I.O. He further submits that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will tamper the prosecution evidence and abscond.

Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

The petitioner-Arjun Kumar Sahoo shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the learned Court below in seisin over the matter, including the following conditions: (i) He will not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail. (ii) He will not threaten or try to influence prosecution witnesses while on bail. (iii) He will remain present on each date fixed for trial subject to any order passed by the learned trial Court under Section 317 Crl.P.C. (iv) He will cooperate with the investigation and appear before the I.O. as and when required. Violation of any condition will entail in cancellation of bail. The BLAPL is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Bichi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 17-Dec-2023 08:05:35 ………………………... (SAVITRI RATHO) JUDGE